Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the appearance
of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group.
The sad thing I find here is that a lot of people are trying to moderate the
group. If you want a moderated, invitation only group, start one. If you
are protecting the interest of the unknowing, as it the case with Snoballs,
that is all well and fine. But, if it is just something that you simply
don't like or believe, why the fuck don't we all just ignore it?
At one time, this group was full of people that talked, shared information
and helped people. I would even go so far as to say that at one time, each
one of us though of the others as "friends." Then there was the problems
w/Lil Jay, then DD, and god knows who else.
What the fuck happen?
Imho it started several years ago when some of the old-timers kinda drifted
away. Then a few dropped by and the drift of the group went to arguing about
anything, didn't really matter what the subject was. And it didn't take long
to get to the name calling and deep jabs. I think that drove off some of the
other guys that got tired of reading it. I admit that it was entertaining
for awhile but it does get old. Now it seems like its getting back to the
'friendly' stage with the joking and info trading. Of course, there are
exceptions to everything.
Budd got bored and picked up his fishing pole. He seems to be getting quite a
few bites! Even some of the smarter ones have holes in their lips.
Johnny conchsell is representing the sting ray that killed Crockodile Hunter.
He says he's gonna get him off the hook.
You still don't seem to have it figured out, Greg.
Think back . . . . .I mentioned my beliefs in a post a long time back and
got ripped into for it and was accused of proselytizing, and forcing my
beliefs on others (all false accusations) and was told I was an idiot for
believing. And it hasn't quit.
Why should I not defend myself and my beliefs, Greg?
Well, the problem is that teasing is only fun if it's not offensive to the
Unfortunately, some cannot realize that I take offense at being teased about
what is most dear to my soul, my beliefs.
Nor do I tease someone about their beliefs, for that reason. To me, teasing
a person over a misstatement he made many years ago about bunny suits is one
thing, but teasing a person over what he believes in, what gives him comfort
in this screwed up world, is off limits.
One thing I don't quite understand is how I'm the "victim" in your eyes. I
am not the victim, for according to my beliefs, I am the winner. Does that
show you what I mean about how it should be off limits out of courtesy to a
fellow human being? All the assaults on beliefs are damaging to a person's
sense of worth.
Btw, as you, and others, have mentioned more than once, you can't always
determine if a statement is in jest from pixels on a screen, so you look at
that person's track record with you. Denny, Larry, Nate and others have
teased me enough to understand them a bit. You, for example, in this persona
at least, have been mostly antagonistic. If a person regularly hits you, do
you keep letting them hit you without response?
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:02:43 GMT, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
For sure... It's been my experience that newsgroups that stay strictly on topic
usually dry up and blow away...
Sure, this is a good place to get and give help about Dodge trucks, but there
are only so many questions to ask/answer... the wide range of other stuff we
talk about is what keeps the group going between the "real" purpose of the
IMHO, restricting talk here to dodge is like restricting the talk at a Lions
Club meeting to charity events... After a while you have an empty room to talk
The occasional off-topic "OT" threads are a normal part of any
unmoderated ng. And, (just in case you care), I don't have a problem
with that. However, in the past few months, Budd has included
religious AND/OR political BS into almost every single post that he has
made. That is not the PURPOSE of this ng. And, dare I say, is
unwelcome to many of this ng's participants.
OT threads are fun ... in fact, I am guilty of contributing on many
occasions. What I am griping about here is 1) how common religious
talk is in this ng and 2) when someone makes a post about the torque
spec on a fly wheel, the subject should not go into Jesus walking on
water ... unless the torque spec is something he tripped over and got
or the thread about GPS systems... not specifically related to Dodge, but why
not tap knowledge here?
Hell, I asked about woodworking newsgroups here a few years ago and got great
Congratulations, Budd... that was one of the more Christian and non-judgemental
statements that I've heard in a long time...
Hope he doesn't feel like it was a "personal attack"
(tongue in cheek so hard it hurts)
Budd, come on... no one is breaking any federal laws by telling you to "shut
up" in an online discussion forum. Depriving you of your first amendment
rights? Only a person or entity of authority can do that - no individual
can deprive another of their freedom of speech, or religion - because they
have no authority over the individual.
Case in point - person #1 is standing on a soapbox in the middle of a town
square, going off about who knows what. Person #2, walking by, utters "aw,
shut up, ya blithering idiot!". Person #1 most likely flips person #2 the
bird, and continues on doing what he was doing.
Now - person #3, a police officer, comes along, and tells person #1, "shut
up, or I'm going to arrest you". NOW there's a potential civil rights
If you have a different opinion (ie. you think person #2 can be charged with
a federal offense), please indicate which exact law (title and section from
USC would be helpful) you feel he can be charged with breaking.
Really? Did you go to the site?
In another group, when this happened, I contacted the ACLJ, emailed them a
couple examples of the "discussions" and their response was that no one has
the right in an Usenet group to tell a Christian or a person of any faith or
denomination to stop talking about their beliefs as part of a discussion or
in response to the situations I've mentioned previously or to harrass them
about their faith or belief. As a fact, the Constitution does protect me and
others in those situstions.
But don't take my word for it, go to their site and ask them.
Agreed., but neither example includes the unique characteristics of a Usenet
Tom, the whole point that I'm trying to make is just what you are saying.
There are many here that think they can tell me or anyone of any faith or
denomination that they cannot speak about their faith or beliefs in an
unmoderated group, especially in a response to a misquote, direct question,
or a misunderstanding of a faith, is in violation of laws guaranteeing the
right to speak, write or whistle in Morse Code about their beliefs. That's
the real situation: they are the same ones that would deny anyone of any
faith a chance to speak on their beliefs in a similar situation.
Technically, by law, I CAN, contrary to Craig's "opinion", start a religious
discussion in an unmoderated group by simply adding "OT-" before the title.
In moderated groups, with the permission of the moderator(s) or owner(s),
the same is true.
I really wish someone, preferably someone not a friend and not biased, would
take a closer look at my replies and they will see that IN THE REPLY MESSAGE
BODIES, I do not proselytize or coerce, and only very carefully, in an
informational form, mention my beliefs, and then post that fact for the
benefit of Craig, theguy, Beekeeper, and Roy so I can drop the subject and
go on with what I'm here for, answering questions. I've tried to show this
but some minds are in a rut and don't want to change course
And if no one then wants to accept the truth about my "religious postings"
then it proves that no matter how honest a person has been in a newsgroup,
lies about that person will be accepted over the truth.
It also means this group, which was once praised and respected for quick,
accurate responses to questions about nearly everything and no infighting,
is headed into the trash pile fast.
Anyway, I'm done with the mess. Someone email me if anyone cares enough
about religious freedoms to take an unbiased look. I'm going fishing for a
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.